WHO agree with circumcision

[Creole]

Alas, some benefits of circumcision.
circumcision

I saw that report and can visualise it becoming a recipe for disaster if people start imagining that they'll no longer need to use condoms.

How about just not f*ckign around? Sounds a lot easier than circumcising a grown man.

Expat, LOL, people will never stop f**king around. Anything that helps is good surely. As long as they make sure to point out that you still have to use a condom!!!!

Lol, Expat. Or, as my mother would say, why don't men just put a knot in it??

I posted this because of all the negativity surrounding male circumcision.

Would love to hear from people with such strong views in light of this new report.

Oh, yes, Creole, the WHO report really changed my mind about male circumcision. NOT.

Use a condom. Limit the number of sexual partners you have.

Have yourself and your partner tested for HIV before you ditch the condoms.

All WAY less invasive than circumcision.

Message withdrawn

Ha ha ha the director of HIV/AIDS at the WHO, commenting on circumcision, is called Kevin DE COCK.

I really don't see this as being a valid reason for non-medical circumcision in the UK. Use a condom. Keep your foreskin.

Unless of course you are cicumcising because you hope in some way that your son will be able to shag willy nilly without using barrier protection.

Personally I'd rather just educate my son about the risks of unprotected sex...

I just think it is sending out a dangerous message. You have a (very invasive) way of reducing HIV transmission rates by 60%. And you have a (non invasive) way of reducing HIV transmission rates by say 98%. Which do you go for?

It's absolutely a man's right to be circumcised as an adult if he feels it has health benefits.

Certainly if you were a man who had multiple partners, refused to use a condom and were unwilling to modify your behaviour then it looks like it would be worth doing - bearing in mind it would only improve your odds in the HIV lottery, not actually prevent you being infected for certain.

It doesn't change my personal views on infant circumcision.

not to mention advocating a medical procedure that carries an infection risk in developing nations where adequate healthcare is hard enough to come by.

Sure if a grown man wants to go and get circumcised, that's up to him, but it worries me that infant circumcision will increase as a result of this. It also worries me that men would see being circumcised as an excuse to have unprotected sex, thinking they are 'safe', when they could be causing pregnancies and passing on other STDs to their partners in the meatime.

My point is, there are a lot of people on here who have stated very strongly about the lack of benefits of male circumcision, to the extent of criticising people and their choices.
But the WHO has supported this benefit which some of us have known for a while.

Just hoping other benefits (which there are plenty) will be revealed.

Creole, just because WHO advices this for certain cultures in certain countries, does not mean that circumcision is generally the way to go...

Absolutely not, but there are benefits, its coming to light despite the many protestations. Which is what am getting at, people have stated many a time there are NO scientific benefits blah, blah and bloody blah!

I'm not saying everybody should go and have it done, but respect people and their choices.

Shalom!

I think the WHO was very clear that they intended to make sure that people know they still need condoms.

Creole..but this one good reason is only a reason for people in such a situation...the people you find on mn that want their Kids done ...whole different story....

And the benefit applies only to sexually active, sexually mature males. not infants.

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

its not new research though

you won't get a 'discussion' on circumcision on Mumsnet Creole I'm afraid .. there are too many abjectly horrified and vociferous posters who use the terminology of abuse to allow for it

its just one of those subjects

Yes, its research that has been around for a while.

Pruni - yes I am referring in the plural because there are BENEFITS hon!

Some of them are:

Penile cancer rates are 3 times higher in uncircumcised male

Uncircumcised male more likely to develop urinary tract infection during first year of life.

Women with a circumcised partner have lower rates of cervical cancer. See links below.

circumcision and cervical cancer

benefits of circumcision

I wont be surprised if people dispprove of these research.

Twiglett, you may be right, it seems (in this forum anyway) only one viewpoint is allowed. Opposing views are vilified.
My point really is the strong views we had earlier about people saying there are NO benefits, but now the WHO has accepted this benefit. But I don't need the WHO to tell me that, I knew all along.

What we as a society should be doing, is encouraging parents to use safer methods/surgery to minimise the risks.

This is never going away.

Shalom

how about teaching boys from a young age to wash their knobs properly...

if you want to refer the reader to research, cancer research mention that hygiene is an important factor in reducing the risks of all these nasties to the level of a circumcised penis.

it's mutilation at the end of the day, not unlike like female circumcision.

circumcised willies are more attractive looking though...

Think when it comes to penises, beauty is in the eye of the beholder!